Josh Gargus a écrit :
> 
> On Jun 26, 2006, at 6:18 AM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote:
> 
>> Cees De Groot a écrit :
>>
>>> On 6/26/06, Pavel Krivanek <squeak1 at continentalbrno.cz> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You don't expect that's possible to take bootstrapped 3.9 kernel  image
>>>> (http://www.squeaksource.com/KernelImage.html) and make it clean  from
>>>> the licensing perspective?  I don't think that it's more complicated
>>>> than Spoon checking.
>>>>
>>> Well, Spoon's kernel image is so small, you can see all of it running
>>> at once :). But I don't see either project precluding the other, in
>>> fact.
>>> How small is that 3.9 image, code wise?
>>
>>
>> One of the proposal  (from Tim) -- to check with the laywer I guess  
>> -- was to relicensed all the SqL code under APLS2.0. If possible,  it 
>> will not be that paintfull to migrate from 3.9 and it will get  use a 
>> ready to use image. Of course it is not incompatible with the  Spoon 
>> track.
>>
>> I also proposed a semi automatic way to do that: any code copyright  
>> owner not willing to see his code relicensed to APSL2.0 should say  so 
>> before a given dead line.
> 
> 
> This sounds nice, but I'd like to have a lawyer OK it.  Here's a  
> hypothetical situation: if Disney doesn't speak up before the date,  and 
> they later decide that they don't want "their" code licensed  under 
> APSL2.0, would the argument that they missed the deadline stand  up 
> against their lawyers in court?  Possibly, but not certainly;  their 

The main problem with post Squeak 1.1 code, is the code owned by Disney. 
This one for sure we don't want to keep it.

So we are back to the main idea of the Squeak migration meeting: to 
determine which classes need to be removed and rewritten.

A first step could be to determine which code is owned by Disney.
But of course this will be only possible if people of that time speak 
up. But I am afraid the free software culture is something unknwown for 
this people. I am sorry to be rude, but personnaly for my own software 
development I really need Squeak to be part of the free software community.

So basicly, two options:
- people help to dermine to identify Disney copyrighted owned code. We 
have a chance to do big clean up,

- people does not help to identify Disney copyrighted owned code. We go 
directly the Spoon way and just forget and delete about all the 
morph/etoys/etc. stuffs. Then we use other stuff as SqueakGTK+ effort to 
  provide the UI. For sure, Squeak will be a much more 
developer/business Smalltalk system that way. It all depends on us.

Sound crazy right?

Hilaire